Palantir analytical system

Document

Document

U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter of Alpine has called for a congressional investigation into how the Army handled requests for software that helps troops beat improvised bombs in Afghanistan, saying that Pentagon bureaucrats doctored a report that favored an off-the-shelf version over the Army’s internal program.

Hunter has asked for an inquiry from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by fellow San Diego County Republican Darrell Issa. The committee could announce action in the next few days.

In a letter last week to the oversight committee, Hunter said several “urgent need” requests from the 82nd Airborne Division in Afghanistan were repeatedly denied for a mapping and information program by Palantir, a Palo Alto-based software manufacturer, despite its higher find-and-clear rates for improvised bombs.

Instead, he claims that officials interfered with a report by the Army Test and Evaluation Command, which is supposed to supply unbiased assessments so that military leaders can make sound decisions on equipment.

The report was allegedly altered in favor of a program called Distributed Common Ground System-Army, a software effort by the Army in conjunction with a team of defense contractors, including Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.

“The idea that ground combat units in Afghanistan are being denied intelligence tools that are requested and readily available is unsettling and underscores a major failure in a process that is intended to deliver resources to the warfighter as quickly as possible,” Hunter wrote in his letter.

Hunter’s allegations came last week, but complaints about the Army’s DCGS program go back at least to June 2011. That’s when the website Politico published a report based on interviews with former Army intelligence officers.

Lt. Col. Freddie Mack, an Army spokesperson, declined to comment on the alleged report revisions, saying in an email, “There is an ongoing investigation being conducted to determine the facts in the matter.”

Mack noted the Army is using Palantir in parts of the combat theater and signed an agreement in May to further assess the technology and how it might integrate with current systems.

Northrop Grumman didn’t respond to a request for comment late Tuesday and Lockheed declined to comment.

The homemade roadside bomb has been the enemy’s favorite and most-effective weapon in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. military has scrambled to counter it, spending billions on equipment to jam detonation signals and armored trucks to shield troops from blasts. The Pentagon established the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization in 2006.

But improvised bombs are still a threat in Afghanistan. Homemade bomb explosions were up 25 percent in the summer of 2011, compared with 2010, according to the U.S.-led coalition there.

Formed in 2004 by former PayPal workers and Stanford scientists, Palantir’s software has been used by Marines in Afghanistan, in addition to the Air Force. According to a memo released by Hunter’s office, the Marine Corps first approved use of Palantir for its Afghanistan troops in October 2010.

Palantir software compiles data and shows it over a map. For improvised bombs, the program can show the number of past incidents and who is believed to have planted the devices, to be used as a predictor of future bomb attacks. All of this information can be pulled down on a laptop in the field.

The Army Test and Evaluation Command reviewed the Palantir software based on a 100-person survey in a report released April 25.

Those surveyed were primarily military service members in the Air Force, Marines and Army, while 33 were civilians from the Department of Defense and contractors.

A second report was released one month later lacking some of the positive survey comments and recommendations for use. Negative comments about the DCGS system being “overcomplicated, requires lengthy classroom instruction, and is an easily perishable skill set if not used constantly” were also deleted.

According to an internal memo, copies of the first report were to be destroyed at the direction of Col. Joseph M. Martin. He also asked for the names of people who received the report.

Though much of the report remained, recommendations to add more Palantir servers in Afghanistan, one week of Palantir training for select teams and advanced classes for specialized noncommissioned intelligence officers deploying to areas likely to use the program were removed.

A recommendation to simply use the report in future program assessments took its place.

As noted in both versions of the report, 96 out of 100 respondents said the software was effective in supporting their mission, and 90 agreed the software saved them time.

Hunter’s spokesman Joe Kasper said the San Diego congressman became interested in the software dispute in November 2011 when he heard about complaints coming out of the Army’s 82nd Airborne. People within the Pentagon began providing him with information.

The Army doesn’t have any sizable bases in Hunter’s East County district. But his spokesman said that Hunter’s status on the House Armed Services Committee, plus his Marine combat experience, compelled him to investigate the issue.

“Congressman Hunter has been very involved in IEDs. IEDs have killed many people from Southern California in every branch of the service,” Kasper said. “And IEDs are going to be a major problem in any theater conflict in which the United States is engaged.”

Hunter’s staff said the congressman has not received any campaign contributions from Palantir. The company did not respond to requests for comment Tuesday.